Relevance of the diagnosis 'stage 1 pressure ulcer': an empirical study of the clinical course of stage 1 ulcers in acute care and long-term care hospital populations

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Stage 1 pressure ulcers are difficult to diagnose. Several prevalence studies have shown that almost half of the pressure ulcers identified are stage 1. The present study investigated the importance of stage 1. The following research questions were formulated: Is there a difference between the prevalence of stage 1 pressure ulcers identified in the institutions participating in the present study and that found in the other institutions participating in the Dutch National Prevalence Survey? What percentage of stage 1 pressure ulcers are reversible within a few hours? What is the clinical course of stage 1 pressure ulcers? Which patient characteristics and preventive interventions are related to the clinical course of stage 1? The study used a prospective, descriptive and comparative design. All patients of six long-term care hospitals and six acute care hospitals in whom stage 1 pressure ulcers were identified during the 1999 National Prevalence Survey in the Netherlands were followed for 1 week (acute care hospitals; n = 68 patients) or 2 weeks (long-term care hospitals; n = 115 patients). The patients were reassessed using the questionnaire developed for the National Prevalence Survey (patient characteristics, assessment of risk of pressure ulcers, characteristics of the pressure ulcers and use of preventive methods) on the same day as the national survey itself, and again after 3 days, after 7 days and after 14 days (only long-term care hospitals). The results showed fewer stage 1 pressure ulcers in the institutions participating in the present study than in the National Prevalence Survey, the difference being almost 50%. The first reassessment found the prevalence of stage 1 to be further reduced by an average of almost 50%, a reduction which was greater for the long-term care hospitals than for the acute care hospitals. However, some of the ulcers that had disappeared reappeared in subsequent reassessments. In the long-term care hospitals, 8.7% of the stage 1 pressure ulcers deteriorated to a higher stage, vs. 22.1% in acute care hospitals. No significant patient characteristics were found to affect the course of stage 1, except that women in acute care hospitals more often had a stage 1 pressure ulcer at the first reassessment than men. In general, patients whose stage 1 ulcer deteriorated were undergoing more preventive interventions; not all differences were significant. We conclude that, although stage 1 is reversible in most cases, it can be interpreted as an important warning sign for nurses and patients to act. If no adequate interventions are applied, the pressure ulcer may deteriorate.